Le Monday 03 November 2008 18:26:44 Alexander Gavrilov, vous avez écrit : > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Francis Galiegue <fg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It just seems to me that this is emulating functionality that multiple Web servers already provide... > > > > What's more, knowledge about these Web servers are _much_ more widespread than knowledge about gitweb. > > > > Why reinvent the wheel? > > If you are speaking of web servers as in 'GitHub', then it is > irrelevant, because its server software is nonfree. > I didn't even account for these. > If you are speaking of web servers as in 'Apache', then how would it > know which files are going to be accessed when it executes > cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=very/private/project.git to check permissions? > Well, as far as Apache is concerned, it can do: * basic .htpasswd authentication, * LDAP, * PAM, * SSL certificate check (via mod_ssl), * probably others. Plenty of possibilities. Well, that's just mho. But if ever I complete my current work on git-cvsimport (or using git2(svn|git)), I'll go for option 2: my LDAP database has all the info, and Apache knows about Cache-Control, not gitweb... NOTE: I'm just saying here that your patch is of no use as far as _I_ am concerned. I'm basically saying that git cannot account for all authentication schemes out there. Neither can Apache, but it supports a buckload of them already. -- fge -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
